click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
leaders who were lackeys of the united states and israel, were out of touch with the youth ask the populations in their countries, whereas the president of syria was a young 45 at the time. he was a computer nerd. he liked the technological toys of the west. he was in touch with the syrian population. he certainly was not a lackey of the united states, and israel. in fact he was supported of hezbollah, amass, iran, and other groups and states, that had a lot of street credibility in the arab world. so they thought it would pass them over. in fact i know that president bashar had mentioned -- commissioned three studies in february and march before the uprising broke out, and all three said, no, it's not going to happen in syria. so he felt pretty confident. i know for -- i can guarantee you that he was absolutely shocked when the uprising really started to seep into syria, particularly, of course, what lit the fire was the arrest and roughing up of the 15 school age children, teenagers, in the southern city of duras in syria. that touched a nerve. that sort of thing happened in
east. elections are coming up in israel, in jordan, in egypt, iran and elsewhere. we're seeing in front of our eyes more violent change happening in syria. the reverberations of which are being felt on everyone of that country's borders. elsewhere from beirut to bahrain domestic politics is at a low boil ready to burst out in a way that can affect our interests in very fundamental ways. there are two problems at the far ends of the threat spectrum. the iran nuclear challenge on the one hand and the spread of al qaeda and affiliated terrorism on the other that will continue to dominate and lest we forget within a year of taking office both presidents obama and bush, his predecessor, were faced with previously unforeseen events that fundamentally challenged their middle east policies. 9/11 for president bush and the arab spring for president obama. so there's a lot on the agenda. today we're going to take a early look at what will be and what should be the foreign policy of a second obama administration in the middle east. now we at the washington institute, for us this is just the beginn
#% of all the foreign aid that we do, a lot of money. israel, egypt, pakistan, iraq, and afghanistan. nothing wrong with that, but we have to work with our frens to the south. we put in 1.4, and with additional money, it's $1.9 billion. for every one dollar we help with mexico, they spend $13. they spend a lot of money on security. they got to -- we got to understand what they are doing. now, what we started off, we did the easy thing, buy them hell cometters, buying this, and e worked with george bush, and filed the first legislation before bush talked about the plan because i felt that strongly about helping mexico, but nevertheless, we worked together. we did the easy thing with mexico, the helicopters and the planes. the hard part is this is we got to start training or billing the capacity, the prison systems, the prosecutors, the policemen. we're working on it at the federal level, and they trained 36,000 police. i think they need 150,000 or more than that. we have to go into judges, train the judges, the prosecutors. did you know that a prosecutor here in the united states, if
and israel. former obama administration released adviser dennis ross is interviewed by former state department spokesman. the talk of sanctions and the administration's approach to that country's nuclear program. this is about 40 minutes. [applause] >> thank you very much. dennis and i have done this a lot of the years, never before an audience. [laughter] when you are the president's foreign-policy spokesman and handing out in the roosevelt room as you have the israeli prime minister and then chairman arafat and the president trying to reach middle east piece you go and say, okay. but we tell the press. look, you can tell them what everyone except for this, this, and this. what else is there? but now we have the dennis two is out of the government. and writing a new book. so if you think about the next four years, clearly how the united states relationship evolves with ron, then the clear issue can be resolved short of conflict will be among those, if not the most pivotal issue facing the president in his second term. so start off, in 2009 when you were at the state department's as
and e. pluribus unum the radical multicultural. israel to palestine, christianity to government, capitalism to markets, and where the rest of the world considers only government employees worthy of being armed, america was founded on precisely the opposite foreign premise. and it is these same conservative values, these same conservative founding principles that will see you in the world through this storm. i know you are hurting, and i know you are falling behind your own potential. the well oiled has become sluggish. organized in thought that turns to sloppily sourced. shifted to survival, debt is historic. the rise of china concerning. the attacks on your embassies this concerning. exceptional fields like your evening out. you got a piano of all pianos on your back. and right now, even help seems fruitless. i can tell you one thing. my country, in my country, and others, everyone has written you off. they say we already live in a post-american world. that america's time has expired, that it's done, that it has mold pashtun no more like to briefly that it is gone, finished. th
, canada, the allies, most democracies not israel, india, and other countries, but most are protocol one. in the mid-70 -- mid-80 #s, they used protocol one, the other didn't, changed sides and so on. the side you followed the rules, guess what? they lost the war game. during the 1990s, american lawyers and human rights watch and amnesty international charged the united states air force with serious violations of the laws of war during the bombing campaign in kosovo and yugoslavia bringing these before the tribunal for the former yugoslavia using one as the rules. amnesty internationals cry the failure to give effective warning before bombing. human rights watch complained the u.s. air force was too concerned with ensuring pilot safety. these are american writers writing this, complaining about the american air force, too worried about the safety of american service members. these are the global rules. people talk about global rules, these are the global rules. it's an example of transnational politics, a new kind of politics. the violations of the law of war were based on protocol one.
will they want to go down in flames or will they want to launch a chemical attack against israel, for instance, desperately trying to turn a domestic conflict into an arab israeli war that will take the pressure off them for a little bit, coe aless the people around israel and soing for. that's the dooms day scenario. >> wonderful, thank you so much for being here. [applause] >> i would like to invite you to >> this event took place at the 17th annual texas book festival in austin, texas. for more information about the festival visit texas festival.org. >> up next, beatrix hoffman presents a history of the american health care system. she present your thoughts on why the united states has been one of the few developed countries do not adopt universal health care. and examines where the issue is so divisive. this is just under an hour. >> hello, everyone. i'm dale davis. and a former faculty member of women's studies, women's history and so on, so i'm delighted to be here. and happy we are sponsoring this program. thank you to all of you, and thank you, gretchen, for the nice introduction. it's
of western europe, canada, most of our allies, most democracies -- not israel, india and some other countries -- but most countries are due to adhere to protocol i. during the '80s the united states conducted a series of war games, they changed sides and so on and the side that you follow protocol i rules, guess what? they always lost the war game. during the 1990s at amnesty international charged the united nations -- charged the united states air force with serious violations of the laws of war during the bombing campaigns in kosovo and yugoslavia. they brought these charges before a u.n.-sponsored international criminal tribunal for the former yugoslavia which uses protocol i, so amnesty international decried the consistent failure to give effective warning to civilians before bombing. human rights watch complained that the u.s. air force was too concerned with insuring pilot safety. these were american lawyers writing this, complaining about the american air force, too worried about the safety of american service members. so these are the global rules. when people talk about global rules,
on in the world. israel and palestine is going up again. you have a lot of things happening. so does this make sense? >> if we had not been in iraq and afghanistan in the last 10 years, his art has a great presence in the pacific. as we look at the importance of the region, as we look at economic growth and we expect to see 50% of economic growth in the coming decade, as we look at the tremendous opportunities that we have, in the context of the china that is rising and economic power, it is clear that make sense rebalance to asia-pacific, even as we continue to engage globally. >> one of the things that is really interesting is that when america was shifting to asia, many of them here said you were going to neglect it. well, at that point, i don't think it was a fair comparison. because i didn't feel that american american resources were stretched to such a point that there is such a zero-sum game between one part of the world on the other. this is not being presented we had an idea about how women can have it all. the answer is no, that there are limits. >> we have continued deep engagements
try to run away from that situation in syria and israel and iran, it's, yeah, light footed or heavy footed, leadership is needed. >> one follow-up question. do you see the current situation, you talked about the instability and opportunity as they say in america, an opportunity to change the channel. is it likely an opportunity for assad to change the channel and get an engagement with israel and -- [inaudible] >> put aside -- discuss palestine, it is a unifying ground for arabs and for muslims so i don't -- i mean, again the danger of changing the subject away from syria is really multiple faceted, but those things would be an opportunity to strike a deal between the regime, and maybe they did all right, but it's not about giving back, and we can talk about the development more later, but i think the israelis have to decide actually what is it in interest? is it better to consider that jihadis, dangerous for them, if you will, and couple up with the regime or stay coupled up with the regime because they have been for a long time. is that in their better interest? is it in their int
important foreign policy has become to them and particularly their strong support for the state of israel. i wouldn't say every mailing we send, just about every mailing we sent out mentioned either obama removing jerusalem from the capital of israel and reinserted it or mentioned his call for israel to return to 67 border or mentioned the fact that his administration had slow walked sanctions against iran. those issues have real resonance among them. >> jonathan is one of washington's most thoughtful journalists. he's been covering this steek or it for a long time, and thank you, ralph, for your excellents. he's the money and politics report enand the past president of the national prez club. what did you see yesterday what does it mean for the country and. >> well, in 2010, we saw the secret money in the races took control of the senate and house. and all service said, it's going to be a foreshadow in the 2012. it wasn't. obama was able to raise as much money with romney. romney had help with the super political action committees and outside groups. the money was even. obama wasn't swamped
began by asking about what is happening, and what i think of the coverage of that today. any time israel is involved in the story it becomes an increase do it excruciatingly difficult story for american journalists to cover because there is for the most part a natural sympathy in this country. a sense of identity in this country and many reporters both friends and colleagues of mine, the late peter jennings used to road defeat to write and be criticized for taking an anti-israeli point of view not so much that he had spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic point of view to arabs. i fink what is happening in gaza means almost any definition of tragedy. they cannot be expected on the one hand to stand by while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the great irony of the paradox of that story is because the israeli defense forces are infinitely more professional than the hamas fighters. the number of casualties on the palestinian side are always going to be much greater thereby leaving an impression that there is somehow something unfolded about the war. this
their strong support for the state of israel. i wouldn't say every mailing we sent out, but just about every mailing that we sent out mentioned either obama removing jerusalem as the capital of israel from his platform and then belatedly reinserting it, or it mentioned his call for israel to return to '67 borders, or it mentioned the fact that his administration had slow-walked sanctions against iran. and those issues have real resonance among pro-israel evangelicals. >> jonathan saw hasn't is one of washington's most thoughtful journalists. he's been covering this sector for a long time, and thank you, ralph, for your comments. he is the money and politics reporter for bloomberg, and he's also the past president of the national press club. what did you see yesterday, and what does it mean for the country? >> well, in 2010 we saw all this secret money into the races, and the republicans took control of the senate and the house, and all observers said this is just going to be a foreshadowing of 2012. it wasn't. obama was able to raise as much money as romney. romney had help with some of the
and shorter. and so, you know, if only we see china, israel, others have drawn is now, the iranians have some jobs right now. it's going to be a very short time frame before we have to deal with the other side of that we are already dealing with cyber attacks each and every day on our infrastructure, not the kind used in the olympic games, similar. so the answer to your question is, it can reinforce existing power structures, but it can then also empower not state actors far faster than we did reinforced. >> i would say that david's concluding point is a fair one, except coming back to us, i think that we have kept ourselves still in this environment as being extremely competitive, and you reference to an area that is a key one for the s states. that is energy. the united states is number one in natural-gas. the united states has been working very aggressively in terms of ensuring that it is energy independent, and it toward this end, just the other day the "wall street journal" highlighted the fact that the united states is now has really grown exponentially in terms of its own oil productio
right, my top issue is that there's all this controversy about whether or not israel is going to go to war with iran. and when president obama spoke about the big yellow bird, i don't think he was talking about the big yellow bird, i think he was talking, you know, big bird on tv, i think he was talking about china. china, you know, chinese people, oriental people are referred to as yellow. china has the largest population on earth, a billion people. they have so many people that they force women to have abortions. they have no respect for human life at all. and china is friends with iran. china is trading partners with iran. if we help israel go to war with iran, then we're going to have to deal with an angry china, and i think that's a really big problem, and we have to just put a stop to it and negotiate peace. >> well, as i said in the opening statement that, um, i really feel that our biggest problem is the deficit, but i believe that the reason why we haven't been able to, um, to lower the national debt is because our political system is broken. and we need to fix it, or this
relationship. in israel there were some day care centers that had a problem. a problem encountered by day care centers around the world. parents coming late to pick up their children. teachers would have to stay with the children until the late arriving parents came. with the help of some economists, they instituted a fine for the late arriving parents. what do you think happened? [laughter] there were more late arrivals. now, why should this be? according to the standard economic reasoning, charging for something should decrease rather than increase the willingness to consume now. so what happened here? well, something similar to what was going on. before when parents came late, they felt guilty. they were imposing inconvenience on the teachers. but now they treated it as a fee for a service. like hiring a babysitter. and you don't feel guilty when you pay money to the babysitter to perform the duty of looking after your child. the attitudes changed. monetary payment change the relationship between the parent and the day care center and crowd out the sense of obligation to show up on time. wh
was spent, okay, working with steve israel to make sure we had the intellectual, financial, whatever resources to prevail in those races. my second time that i spent was to call people who were not successful, in this particular election. because everybody here was getting a lot of calls. winning is very noisy. not succeeding is kind, the bells don't drink that much so i wanted to hear from them, what their views were about how to go forward. and then to absorb the calls of my colleagues to see what their view is. but when i talked about here about changing the role of money in politics is really a very important motivator for me. to stay in the leaders office. i think it must be done. when people say that oh, and i've read in the course of this week, money didn't make any difference in the campaign, they'll wasted their money. well, that really wasn't true. the president of the united states, the most well known, famous, respected person on the planet, had to spend about a billion dollars to set the record straight from what the other big money was putting out there. senate races, h
for instance we see for example that the list of bases includes the dimona nuclear facility in israel which has a u.s. base attached to it that has 120 soldiers. but when you look at the list of where the soldiers are it isn't listed so it's like wait a minute, what's going on here? it's become very opaque. is very hard to get good numbers. >> host: let's show some have stats from the defense department on u.s. military personnel deployment. obviously the united states and its territories have the most at 1.2 million afghanistan with the ongoing actions there, 66,000 troops. talk about the next two, germany and japan, why we need 53,000 troops in germany and 39,000 troops still in japan these days? >> guest: we don't. that's a simple answer. they should be brought home. >> host: what is their mission there right now? >> guest: their mission is left over from the cold war. these were troops that were placed there to prevent a soviet attack on eastern europe. there is no more tzipi at union and there is no more cold war. we don't face that kind of threat. in japan we are being told that they are
commitment to the welfare, security and survival to the state of israel and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. ms. landrieu: i further ask, mr. president, the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed at the appropriate place in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. con. resolution 60 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 60 providing for conditional adjournment or recess of the senate pending adjournment of the house of representatives. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. ms. landrieu: i ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with n
you now, we see china, israel, others have drones now. every nymphet drums right now. it's going to be a very short time. before we do with the other side of that. we're already dealing with cyberattacks each and every day on our infrastructure, not the kind in the olympic games, but similar kinds. the answer to your question is it can reinforce existing power structures, but cannot also empower nonstate airs far faster than we get reinforced. >> i would say david's concluding point is a fair one except coming back to us. i think that we have kept ourselves still in this environment has been extremely competitive and you reference an area for the united states and that's energy. the united states is number one in natural gas. the united states has been working very aggressively in terms of ensuring that it is energy independent and towards this end, just the other day at "the wall street journal" highlighted the fact that the united states is now really grown exponentially in terms of its own oil production. i think were going to see more of that. precious to different powerbase
to try to find a way that will end the killing in syria not only because it has canings for israel and other countries in indonesia, but because it sits, of course, a terrible negative example to others bad guys in this region and elsewhere who will be encouraged if they can get away with these types of behavior if we don't act. so i think this is a huge challenge that we need to face. and the solution is not a military solution. it's a smart one. >> we have to wrap up soon. to get the conference back on schedule. two more comments here and back there to get them in. >> thank you very much. [inaudible] i'm the australia commissioner in australia. i'm afraid on -- [inaudible] i wanted to make a point after having had a long period of being a diplomatic prak practitioner. particularly in my world and to say that the new normal viewed from outside of the world has some good news, which i just would like to throw in. one is that while this is being happening in the rest of the world, china we know what happened in china. but thailand has sufficiently grown to no longer being a recipien
that immediately border syria and have an impact, and, obviously, israel, which is having already raised concerns as we do about, for example, movement of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere. and i could have an impact not just within syria, but on the region as a whole. i'm encouraged to see that the syrian opposition created an umbrella group that may have more cohesion than they've had in the past. we are going to be talking to them. my envoys are going to be traveling to various meetings that are going to be taking place with the international community and the opposition. we consider them a legitimate representative of the aspirations of the syrian people. we are not yet prepared to recognize them as some sort of government in exile, but we do think that it is a broad-based representative group. one of the questions that we're going to continue to press is to make sure that that opposition is committed to a democratic syria, an inclusive syria, a moderate syria. we have seen extremist elements put themselves into the opposition. and one of the things that we have t
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)